Jeremy Miller tweets (Senior Programmer at ISI)

Ales Ogrinc said:
Thats what i suggested weeks back to. Beta builds more often so we can test and report them more. Somehow ISIs beta testers usually concentrate on new stuff implented only from content or what is added to the game and they forget to check other stuff that is than broken and becase of that we get every second build that brakes something like reflections.

Another thing would be good to hear more on modders what is needed to be implented like the diferent light styles, light flares, driver animations and more we are only putting into wishlist sofar and some of those small things we wish for would make modders life far more easy to live with.
Click to expand...

+ gazillion
 
Tim Wheatley said:
I've suggested this internally as well (releasing of RC in dev corner, unannounced, then releasing bug free announced build later). Just got to wait and see what happens.
Click to expand...

Interesting suggestion. Don't know if this could happen or not. Pretty sure rF2 Community will appreciate if something goes this way. I'm not as often as I would like to be driving with rF2 so I will not be able to be a serious beta tester if this happen, but I know for sure some guys around who will be really pleased to eventually participate and give useful feedback to the dev team. Ok, will see! :)
 
Tim Wheatley said:
I've suggested this internally as well (releasing of RC in dev corner, unannounced, then releasing bug free announced build later). Just got to wait and see what happens.
Click to expand...
Why not some kind of opt in so that those who want the betas get notified and those not interested just get told about the main releases ? Could maybe be in the advanced tab of the launcher .
 
Yeah something like +devbranch in the advanced tab would work well, something that's complicated enough that no one could do it by accident.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4
 
Tim Wheatley said:
I've suggested this internally as well (releasing of RC in dev corner, unannounced, then releasing bug free announced build later). Just got to wait and see what happens.
Click to expand...


I suggested similar a long time ago there should be two versions of rfactor2 one that is release ready tested and another one which is a dev update test version. But I remember not many people responded too well to this, perhaps they never saw the positives and especially to the more serious league racing.
NVidia have the right idea with there drivers WHQL and beta version, I certainly feel confident with WHQL I never had a bad one, infact I usually use the latest beta until fps become a factor or crashing I then return to WHQL.
 
Mibrandt said:
I think that releasing unstable builds with obvious flaws and bugs such as e.g. reflection issues is perfectly ok as long as its a Beta game. But as far as I know the Beta period is over?? To me that means that we could rightfully expect that every released build works like intended without any obvious bugs - and then the product naturally evolves with new fully functioning features for every new build. If its not Beta anymore the customers shouldnt be the testers anymore. Furthermore I dont understand how the shadows popping up / lod issues / bad AA / Flickering lights etc could survive the transition from Beta to "evolving product". That should be fixed as an absolute minimum before going out of Beta.
Click to expand...

Exactly my viewpoint and I was shot down in flames when I mentioned it months ago, maybe even a year ago cant remember exactly!

Anyway yeah as this game is NOT a Beta product we should expect each Build to work correctly and each Build should be an improvement on the last. Features being added one Build then broken the next is simply not on anymore and personally I find it frustrating and simply mindless, if you're gonna release Builds that are constantly breaking various parts of the game then we may as well rename it Beta because that is what it is.

Whether or not this game is a "Constantly evolving product" is neither here nor there if certain aspects are broken when they worked fine before, either do as has been suggested and release Beta Builds (as AMD/nVidia/Other games do) or properly test each Buld before release...it's kind of common sense surely?! The days of Two steps forward One step back need to be erradicated and erradicated now.
 
Axeslayer said:
Why not some kind of opt in so that those who want the betas get notified and those not interested just get told about the main releases ? Could maybe be in the advanced tab of the launcher .
Click to expand...

Great idea, especially if the end-user consents to and is prepared to take the risk.
I'd go one further by allowing those users to submit crash reports to ISI for internal deciphering.
That'd really increase the rate of progress.
I'd imagine that'd take a huge workload off the internal testers as well as expose rF2 to a wider variety of system configurations.
While my experiences have been overall mostly positive with the occasional hiccup, I can certainly understand the frustration of others.
It's been many, many years since the release of rF1. It's been quite a few more years since we first saw content and heard of rF2.
While it's clear the release posed new challenges, things like disappearing under-car shadows, blocky smoke, etc... should never have seen the light of day in rF2 (BETA or otherwise)... especially having been perfected in the former and much less complex version.
Difficulty with new aspects like realroad, tire deflection, HDR profiles, perfected physics, etc... I can certainly understand.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not a bad idea indeed!

A "unstable" release vers. with a release cycle round about 1-2 weeks. This pretty untested vers. can include bugs and unfinished features, more like the actual releases.
The "stable" release besides, witch come lets say every 2 month, should be well tested and also have less bugs than the actual (monthly) releases. Which could be a direct benefit from the "unstable" version release's. So no experiments here.

The customer can install a additional "unstable" version of the game, if he want to try new things and/or give usefull feedback to ISI.
New customers would have less problems with the "stable" version of the game.
ISI would benefit from a wider range of tested systems, and more feedback from useres.

But it should only be done if it doesen't disturb or slow down development.
 
MarcG said:
Exactly my viewpoint and I was shot down in flames when I mentioned it months ago, maybe even a year ago cant remember exactly!

Anyway yeah as this game is NOT a Beta product we should expect each Build to work correctly and each Build should be an improvement on the last. Features being added one Build then broken the next is simply not on anymore and personally I find it frustrating and simply mindless, if you're gonna release Builds that are constantly breaking various parts of the game then we may as well rename it Beta because that is what it is.

Whether or not this game is a "Constantly evolving product" is neither here nor there if certain aspects are broken when they worked fine before, either do as has been suggested and release Beta Builds (as AMD/nVidia/Other games do) or properly test each Buld before release...it's kind of common sense surely?! The days of Two steps forward One step back need to be erradicated and erradicated now.
Click to expand...

I'm in 100% agreement with this.

The way I see it, this game most certainly is still in its beta period. In all but name anyway. As Saabjock mentioned above, there are too many things either incomplete, broken or yet to be implemented to call rFactor 2 a 'gold' release.

Sorry Tim/ISI, I think rF2 will be something special one day but the "constantly evolving product" tag is a cop-out. The game needs to reach some kind of complete state before it can then evolve further. It's not there yet and is effectively still in beta.
 
im enjoying your latest chat here and agree, but can any1 tell me is there a new build getting released any time this month ???????
 
Tim Wheatley said:
I've suggested this internally as well (releasing of RC in dev corner, unannounced, then releasing bug free announced build later). Just got to wait and see what happens.
Click to expand...

wouldn't this hurt the online community even more with people having different game versions...or would it run separately to the current version?
 
Jim Beam said:
wouldn't this hurt the online community even more with people having different game versions...or would it run separately to the current version?
Click to expand...

It would run separetely. SDK(moddev) would than be higher beta builds and the sp/mp version would be more stable one, i guess that is the idea.
 
You can have multiple different rF2 installs in your computer so having different version isnt a problem.
Having a stable release and beta versions would be nice idea in my oppinion.
 
Tim Wheatley ‏@timwheatley1979 1h
The chances of having Pirtek in with our BTCC Honda Civic release seem quite high. Still working on it while we wait for approval to release
 
I see this too Jamie, sounds promising but i wonder why they have not given the approval for release yet, I would have thought that now the btcc season is over, the Honda would of made a apperance by now. I have a feeling the Honda will be popular :D
 
Yeah, really can't wait for the BTCC Civic. If it's as good as the other FWD car - the Clio - then it should be a lot of fun. I feel the Clio and GSC's Mini are the benchmark FWD cars in sim racing so really want to see how the Civic compares.

FWD cars are often denigrated in sim-racing circles but I find them just as involving to drive as RWD cars.
 
9229490529_af4a9ef7ed_z.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top